Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Does the presence of hydronephrosis have effects on micropercutaneous nephrolithotomy?

  • Urology – Original Paper
  • Published:
International Urology and Nephrology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

To evaluate the effects of presence of hydronephrosis on micropercutaneous nephrolithotomy (micro-PNL) surgery.

Patients and methods

A retrospective analysis of 112 patients who underwent microperc surgery between December 2012 and April 2014 was performed. Patients were evaluated in two groups according to whether the presence of hydronephrosis. Stone size and location, fluoroscopy and operation time, stone-free rates and patient-related parameters were prospectively recorded into a centralized computer-generated system.

Results

A total of 58 patients in Group 1 with hydronephrosis and 54 patients in Group 2 with no hydronephrosis were analyzed. There was no statistically significant difference in terms of stone sizes and body mass indexes (BMI) in comparison of groups (155.2 ± 93.06 vs. 143.70 ± 70.77 mm2, p = 0.856 and 27.6 ± 4.2 vs. 26.7 ± 3.2 kg/m2, p = 0.625). The success rates were similar (91.3 vs. 92.5 %, p = 0.341). While the mean operation time and fluoroscopy time in Group 1 were 44.2 ± 23.62 min and 105.3 ± 47 s, it was 38.8 ± 26.4 min and 112.53 ± 68.3 s in Group 2, but there was no statistical difference in comparison of both groups. The mean attempts of percutan puncture were 1.35 ± 0.47 in Group 1 and 1.76 ± 0.31 in Group 2 (p = 0.185). We also found no statistical differences regarding mean hemoglobin change and hospitalization time, respectively (p = 0.685 and p = 0753). In comparison of grades of hydronephrosis, there was no statistically significant difference in subgroups analysis.

Conclusions

The presence of hydronephrosis does not affect success rates and operative time in micro-PNL procedures significantly. Micropercutaneous nephrolithotomy is technically feasible and efficacious both in hydronephrotic and non-hydronephrotic kidneys.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Abbreviations

SWL:

Shock wave lithotripsy

EAU:

European Association of Urology

PNL:

Percutaneous nephrolithotomy

RIRS:

Retrograde intrarenal surgery

CT:

Computed tomography

CIRF:

Clinically insignificant residual fragment

BMI:

Body mass index

SFU:

Society of Fetal Urology

References

  1. Bader MJ, Gratzke C, Seitz M, Sharma R, Stief CG, Desai M (2011) The “all-seeing needle”: initial results of an optical puncture system confirming access in percutaneous nephrolithotomy. Eur Urol 59(6):1054–1059

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Desai MR, Sharma R, Mishra S, Sabnis RB, Stief C, Bader M (2011) Single-step percutaneous nephrolithotomy (microperc): the initial clinical report. J Urol 186(1):140–145

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Tepeler A, Armagan A, Sancaktutar AA, Silay MS, Penbegul N, Akman T, Hatipoglu NK, Ersoz C, Erdem MR, Akcay M (2013) The role of microperc in the treatment of symptomatic lower pole renal calculi. J Endourol 27(1):13–18. doi:10.1089/end.2012.0422

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Armagan A, Tepeler A, Silay MS, Ersoz C, Akcay M, Akman T, Erdem MR, Onol SY (2013) Micropercutaneous nephrolithotomy in the treatment of moderate-size renal calculi. J Endourol 27(2):177–181. doi:10.1089/end.2012.0517

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Akman T, Binbay M, Akcay M, Tekinarslan E, Kezer C, Ozgor F, Seyrek M, Muslumanoglu AY (2011) Variables that influence operative time during percutaneous nephrolithotomy: an analysis of 1,897 cases. J Endourol 25(8):1269–1273. doi:10.1089/end.2011.0061

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Turna B, Nazli O, Demiryoguran S, Mammadov R, Cal C (2007) Percutaneous nephrolithotomy: variables that influence hemorrhage. Urology 69(4):603–607

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Fernbach SK, Maizels M, Conway JJ (1993) Ultrasound grading of hydronephrosis: introduction to the system used by the Society for Fetal Urology. Pediatr Radiol 23(6):478–480

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. de la Rosette JJ, Opondo D, Daels FP, Giusti G, Serrano A, Kandasami SV, Wolf JS Jr, Grabe M, Gravas S, CROES PCNL Study Group (2012) Categorisation of complications and validation of the Clavien score for percutaneous nephrolithotomy. Eur Urol 62(2):246–255. doi:10.1016/j.eururo.2012.03.055

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Hatipoglu NK, Tepeler A, Buldu I, Atis G, Bodakci MN, Sancaktutar AA, Silay MS, Daggulli M, Istanbulluoglu MO, Karatag T, Gurbuz C, Armagan A, Caskurlu T (2014) Initial experience of micro-percutaneous nephrolithotomy in the treatment of renal calculi in 140 renal units. Urolithiasis 42(2):159–164. doi:10.1007/s00240-013-0631-2

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Albala DM, Assimos DG, Clayman RV et al (2001) Lower pole I: a prospective randomized trial of extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy and percutaneous nephrostolithotomy for lower pole nephrolithiasis-initial results. J Urol 166:2072–2080

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Zhu Z, Wang S, Xi Q, Bai J, Yu X, Liu J (2011) Logistic regression model for predicting stone-free rate after minimally invasive percutaneous nephrolithotomy. Urology 78(1):32–36. doi:10.1016/j.urology.2010.10.034

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Falahatkar S, Moghaddam KG, Kazemnezhad E, Enshaei A, Asadollahzade A, Farzan A, Damavand RS, Aval HB, Khodabakhsh S, Esmaeili S (2011) Factors affecting operative time during percutaneous nephrolithotomy: our experience with the complete supine position. J Endourol 25(12):1831–1836. doi:10.1089/end.2011.0278

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Conflict of interest

None.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Urology, Faculty of Medicine, Mevlana University, Konya, 42200, Turkey

    Tuna Karatag, Ibrahim Buldu, Ramazan Inan & Mustafa Okan Istanbulluoglu

  2. Department of Urology, Faculty of Medicine, Selcuk University, Konya, Turkey

    Mehmet Kaynar

Authors
  1. Tuna Karatag
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Ibrahim Buldu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Mehmet Kaynar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Ramazan Inan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Mustafa Okan Istanbulluoglu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Tuna Karatag.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Karatag, T., Buldu, I., Kaynar, M. et al. Does the presence of hydronephrosis have effects on micropercutaneous nephrolithotomy?. Int Urol Nephrol 47, 441–444 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11255-014-0907-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11255-014-0907-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation